03 September 2009 9:56 AM

Desperate? No, just not listening

In answer to the question from 'Desperate' (in block capitals) ‘WHEN WILL PETER HITCHINS PUT HIMSELF UP FOR ELECTION?’ one pertinent answer would be: ’When enough people can spell his name.’ I have no illusions that I am set to sweep the country. On the contrary. But this mistake is only a symptom of the wider problem. Those who say they support my criticisms of the government, presumably on the grounds that they accept that I have thought hard about these matters, researched them, and come to conclusions based on principles like their own, then flatly refuse to listen to the most important, and simplest piece of advice I shall ever offer, which is 'Don't vote Tory' (and, since you mention it, don't vote BNP ever either) and especially, 'Don't vote Tory at the coming general election.' This is the best chance in our lifetimes of changing the political direction of the country. A Tory victory would throw it away (while a Tory defeat would deprive us of nothing important. Name me one substantial difference a Tory government under David Cameron would achieve. Just one. Look at the Boris Johnson Mayoralty in London. Is London no longer a politically correct, multi-culti, over-taxed, badly police, badly schooled city? Is it?)

In this country, the only elections that matter are those for Members of Parliament. No major offices, no major powers are available to anyone who is not an MP. Election to Parliament, as Mr 'Desperate' should have noticed by now, is not decided by the people, who approach elections as sheep approach sheep-dip, corralled and obedient. It is controlled by the major parties, whose candidates for Parliamentary seats always win them. In 'safe' seats (of which there are many) the dominant party can guarantee election. In the contested ones, one of the two (occasionally three) does so. Voters do not normally vote for candidates who have not been nominated by these three parties. Peter Hitchins (or Hitchens) would never be nominated by any of these three parties, because he and they have wholly different political objectives. Even if, in a fluke election, Peter Hitchins (or Hitchens) were elected as an MP, he would have no influence whatever in a Parliament still dominated by the existing parties. Hence the need for the creation of a party to replace the Tories which cannot be founded until (please listen carefully to this bit) the Tories split and collapse. Which they will not do if they win the next election. Individual MPs have no influence at all, unless they work in concert with an organised party. Which is why Peter Hitchins (or Hitchens) campaigns for the destruction of the Tory Party, and why he is weary beyond belief with the unwillingness of people such as Mr (or perhaps Mrs) 'Desperate' (who claim to agree with him) to listen with any care to what he actually says.

By the way, I now know there's nothing I can do here to persuade supporters of the BNP that I am their dedicated opponent, that I despise their party and its traditions and that they are fantasising when they imagine this will ever change. I tell them again and again that I wish to have nothing to do with them. These people are beyond reason and facts.

But is it possible for those who drone: 'If New Labour run the country for another five years it will ruin Britain' to pause for a second and realise that - if the Tories have the same policies as Gordon Brown, as they do - they too will destroy the country in five years. In which case why vote for them?

Actually, I think the country is more resilient than that. It can be rescued, but only when it has a party in government that wants to rescue it. A Tory election victory would almost certainly postpone the creation of such a party to some point beyond my death, and that of many others posting here. It will take decades before either of the major parties is ever again as vulnerable as the Tories are now, and before the voters will ever again have so much power as they will have next June. You can't sack the government. It will be the same whatever you do. But you can sack the opposition.

Share this article:

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Forgot to mention the BNP. Why are they even in this debate? I recently saw two of their members appear on a well known Sunday morning TV show. One would think it safe to assume that they would send two people representative of the party to debate on national TV. One of them had the gall to call himself "Reverend" (One can't help thinking that your brother Christopher is right when he says how anyone can get away with saying anything if you get yourself called reverend) can the BNP be taken seriously (with the word "British" in their name) when they exclude vast numbers of British born citizens from their membership on the basis of the colour of their skin? I think that's all that needs to be said about them to exclude them from serious debate. They are not worth the breath it takes to talk about them.

I agree with much of what you say here Peter, although I may well disagree with your political views and beliefs. As you have been saying for some time now, there is no debate in parliament anymore, it has become redundant. Its simply a tool to pass legislation and for the two main parties to posture and blab over the details for the cameras, in order to make it look as if we have two party adversarial politics in this country, which we have not had for at least a decade now.
There is no right or left debate over anything anymore in parliament. The Tories and Labour have simply taken up the centre ground (which the liberals used to occupy) and have proceeded to fight over it. You couldn't fit a credit card between their main policies.
It is time for a peaceful political revolution in this country. I agree with some of the posters here that its no good to just not voting for the Tories in the hope that they fall apart after the next election. I think they'd do what they've done for the last twelve years, simply cobble together an opposition with another new leader, probably George Osbourne who would be just another Cameron.
I think you should stand for election as an indipendant, get into parliament first, then form a party.
It would be interesting to see a worthy and credible left wing party to form to oppose you so that Parliament once again becomes a place where true democracy and adversarial politics takes place.

Your suggestion, Peter, that "voters do not normally vote for candidates who have not been nominated by the three major parties" is right historically but may no longer be so, and you would be an excellent MP, and should seriously consider the possibility of standing.
The Conservatives are not popular - just look at the Norwich North result and now the doctors of "Healthy Independents" planning to stand as MPs as a group. With credible independents, or better still, independent minded but like minded individuals campaigning together on a specific and clear set of policies, and that are formed into a patriotic party or movement ,which cares about ordinary British people, could do very well - even win - such is the antipathy towards the indentikit out of touch politicians of our elite. The current party system is on its last legs and is scandalously being propped up with state funding, especially in the case of Labour and then Lib Dems.

You would have a big impact in Parliament if you were part of a larger group. All in a new movement don't have to see eye to eye on every issue - look at Daniel Hannan who talks and acts like an independent. Decent patriotic British people need to rally around a set of principles and proposals that will rescue Britain economically, culturally and morally and truly represent the vast majority of wonderful people in Britain who are being ruined, bullied, insulted and patronised by Labour, but get no support from the other major parties.
Some of the principles we need to see adopted are 1. Individual Freedom 2. Integrity in political life 3.Civic Duty and Individual Responsibility 4. True Accountability in Government 5. Separation of Powers and 6. A written Constitution to protect us all and civil society from the state.

The manifesto would include a commitment to rein in the database state, reform or abolish all laws that unnecessarily reduce our freedom, dismantle most of the CCTV cameras, de-politicise the police force and make it accountable to the people, end the culture of political correctness, free up local authorities from central control and in the long term to have low taxation and a smaller state.
I agree with you that there is every sign that the Conservatives will be a disaster. Where I disagree is that we can wait for them to split. We need action now and a decent political offering to put before the disillusioned public at the next election. With people like you it can be done. You articulate so many people's frustration and I can't believe that you are happy just writing about it, and watching the disintegration of Britain. I am not either - please get in touch if you feel that you could add something that might enable a patriotic, practical, and honest political movement to get off the ground.

Its interesting you note the BNP members are beyond reason and facts when a great deal of what you spout is in line with the BNPs ideology. Except for a little cosmetic dressing up or down here and there there's really not much of a difference.

I see comments saying that UKIP is a one idea Party ! Though not a paid up member I have come to realise that this ONE IDEA - leaving the EU is the only policy which matters for the UK ! Once the EU (actually the European commissioners) is handed total power over the UK (which the Lisbon Treaty does) - no government (which will actually be a regional assembly with less power than the Welsh assembly) will have it in its power to change anything that is decided in Brussels - even Gordy's infamous 'red lines' are not sacrasanct as once totally ratified the (once again unelected) EU Supreme court can amend any rules or regulation as it see's fit, subject only to the case being put before it - by any other nation ! The Irish do not even have this strength - the promises made (to try to get the yes vote in October) are not even written into the Lisbon Treaty - so hold no value whatsoever ! This should tell everyone just what a con game is being played in our name by worthless, inept politicians !
One Issue - and UKIP alone has the answer ! There is no other option for anyone who claims to be a Tory - Cameron is just NuLab with a blue tie - so why give BluLab any chance of following NuLab policies - but more because a real Tory loves his country and wants to see it once again, Strong, Just and Admired through its freedoms and liberties, fairness and pride !

A. Scott thinks that if the Tories were replaced by a Pro British Patriotic Party, that party would be incapable of winning an election. I entirely disagree for the reasons I gave in my letter of September 4th. Work out the statistics. Such a party, in the political vacuum we are in, should easily win an election.
What William said about what would happen if the Tories won or lost the next election is so right and reinforces what I said about the need to form a new party now. This is the most urgent thing. It is true that the country is rotten, so there is all the more need for it to be pulled back from the brink, but only if we all act now, or it will be too late. We haven't got the years that Peter talks about.
The proposals that Sulla makes are all good. Let's have a proper constructive debate on what he,(or she), wrote, and on what I wrote, so we can agree on what needs to be done.
Will Peter, and others, please reply.

People might then get the idea straight that fascists (like the BNP) and communists/socialists are both anti-conservative left-wing movements. They simply fight so much because they have the enmity of embittered brothers.

I cannot now write your name in full, or choose to use capital letters, since doing so obviously enraged you beyond measure. Grovelling apologies on both counts, and for apparently not reading your opinions as thoroughly as you would wish. Take it as a measure of my ever-increasing desperation.

I have no choice other than to vote Tory in a general election, even though I don't want to, since they are the only party with a chance of being elected. Labour must be ousted (the word 'must' would be in capitals, as would 'would', ideally, did I but dare). My life is being absolutely destroyed by Labour's 'policies' - most notably, on a local level, by a permanent site for gypsies and travellers being set up in my very road. Whether this ruling would change under Tories is debatable - but my only hope.

I still believe you should put yourself forward as an Independent, if only to make your point. It seems the logical next step.

"If Scotland is such a great place, why are there so many of them in England?"

Well, some might suspect it's something to do with job opportunities and the staff selection process. With most UK-wide businesses running their operations from England, any undue preferrence for Scots for middle/senior management jobs tells us something about the standard of non-Scottish applicants. It can't be the accent, can it?
Perhaps the whispered words of my one-time (English) MD as we flew down from Glasgow are worth repeating: "If we could only get personable sales staff in the South-East as good as we've seen up here this week..."

That's not to say, of course, Scotland doesn't have its share of peevish and garrulous folk - they pop up everywhere these days.

You talk of your concern for racial purity and at the same time complain that you are called a racist. The rest of us can legitimately complain about being called racist; but not you Mike, you are a racist if ever there was one. Race clearly seems to be at the centre of all your views. The accusations are therefore almost certainly true.

You also never respond properly to people's arguments (perhaps because you feel uncomfortable about what your views imply in the long term). I put forward a theoretical scenario for you to consider (about being married to a non-white woman who shared your views but who would be frowned upon by the BNP); Where was your response to this? You merely reply each time with a generalised recruiting call for the BNP. If you're looking for new BNP recruits on this blog I think you're wasting your time.

British patriotism is not visual (i.e skin and flags) it is something much deeper than that; it is about behaviour, culture, Christianity, and freedom. These things have always, until recently, applied to everyone who lives here, not just to a particular racial group.

You are not so much a conservative with confused views about race; I put it to you that you are a racist with confused views about conservatism.

If Scotland is such a great place, why are so many of them in England? Everywhere you go you will one of them wittering on in that extremely irritating accent telling us that Scotland is vastly superior to England which, of course, it isn't. If it's such a prosperous country, why are we forced to subsidise them?

The Scotch (I know, I know but, if it was good enough for Dr Johnson, it's certaily good enough for me) are robbing us blind and I, for one, will be glad to see the back of them.

No wonder the Lib Dems keep failing with leader names like Nick Clegg. They were better off with Gladstone.

----

What strange reasoning - for one the last two lib dem leaders were Ashdown and Kennedy (both feature your 'un' sound), and two, Callaghan and Brown weren't elected - and Blair was pretty much universally known as 'Tony' (not 'Tunny') - maybe the names give them the right character or something...

I was interested at Peter Hitchens writing: “Actually, I think the country is more resilient than that. It can be rescued”

The house that the Liberal Establishment have built contains the seeds of Britain’s collapse as the country it was – principally the Stalinist levels of immigration and demographic change and the huge and growing Welfare/Public Sector Complex built on a shrinking tax base.

These trends lead me to think that even if the Tories were replaced by a pro-British patriotic party that party would be incapable of winning a general election. Electoral arithmetic would dictate that to get enough votes to win the party would need to do exactly the same as David Cameron – provide assurances, with regard to the demographic profile, that it likes Britain as it is, and promise to leave the Welfare/Public Sector Complex untouched.

Sorry to be a pessimist, but I think Britain is now as rotten on the inside as Tsarist Russia or Austria-Hungary were back in 1914. As with those dustbin-of-history-regimes, the only issues at stake are the timing of our collapse, and what replacement emerges.

In order for Tory voters to abandon their party in droves - which is, after all, Hitchens professed objective - it would seem to me to be first necessary for them to endure an uncomfortable period of Blue Labour rule, so as to force them to confront the fact that their pet project has been subverted.

Conversely, should the Tories lose the next general election it would, in my opinion, be a disaster as said voters would be able to persist in the delusion that their party is right-wing - Tory performance when in government would not allow them the luxury of such self-deception. This, in addition to the fact that another term of New Labour would just about see the country through.

Never underestimate the mendacity of politicians.I can see all sorts of ways in which they could do it: 'times have changed, it wasn't right then but it is now', 'the terrorist is now much greater than it used to be' or fill in your own response.

I wouldn't wish socialism on my worst enemy, so why would I wish to single out white people who would have the 'privilege' of it being inflicted on them alone under a BNP government?

Simple answers to the Nations predicament:

Cut government spending in ALL areas except defence, law enforcement (where spending must be increased to exceed commitments) and culture (see below)

Abolish Political Correctness, affirmative action and multiculturalism from all institutions as they divide people into artificial or irrelevant groupings and undermine any sense of broader nationhood. It is entirely possible to be black, asian or any other origin and yet still have a deep pride in the nation you were either raised in or have arrived to live in. What is needed is cultural guidance and encouragement, not confusion, self flagellation and fudge. You will never create an entirely homogeneous society but you will succeed in moving people closer together by stressing commonality (in this case a rigorously promoted idea of the great history of this Island nation)

Roll back the frontiers of the state. Low taxation for all. Abolish inheritance tax, VAT and institute an attitude in government that agrees with most people who see taxation as a form of licensed theft.

Strict law and order policies- life should mean life. A referendum on the death penalty and introduction of elected police officials. People can then get the police officials that they want and not nightmare's like the head of the north Wales Traffic Taleban.

Which leads me to...abolish devolution. It's expensive, wasteful of tax payers money (like most government) and has weakened and divided our nation. However much we English may dislike the Scots I would not for the life of me wish them to become the Albania of the North, run by the EU and el presidente Salmond.

Start by attempting to renegotiate every EU treaty in our favour. When that inevitably fails, withdraw from the EU...note I say the EU- not Europe, believe it or not the two are separate!

Stop environmental vandalism. I mean the slathering of our beautiful countryside with wind farms. Abolish CO2 emissions targets and any taxes associated with them until a genuine debate is had over climate change. Encourage proper conservation (i.e. fox hunting and pheasant hunting- believe it or not the countryside is beautified by the people who practice these ancient arts and they contribute the economic and cultural tapestry of Britain).

lets do these things and for heavens sake have some faith in ourselves (and yes I mean the CofE should focus on bringing people back into religion, as opposed to raising the white flag to atheists, Islamists etc).

Above all we need to remember: In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem

Well, John, or Ian, as they say in Scotland, I'm not a Scot, but I can imagine a few claymores being sharpened north of the Border.

Impoverished? Do you not realize that Scots have been in the forefront in terms of medicine, engineering and construction for most of the last two hundred years? Many would say that it was the Scots that built much of the Empire. Their education system has always been said to be superior to ours, and, until recently, they had a world reputation for banking and investment services.
That's not to say they always utter nice things about us - in my two years spent in that country the words that often went with 'English' was 'arrogant' and 'ignorant'.

Contributor RicoRichmond writes:
"One difference between Tories and Labour? How about ID Cards?"

Actually, much as I deplore my fellow-citizens' accelerating acceptance of the arbitrary diktats of our rulers, some good might possibly come from the ID cards idea, provided that there were no dispensations. and provided also that each cardholder had been obliged to provide a DNA sample.
As long as we resist attempts to oblige us all to provide such data for official storage, we may be encouraging a tendency in some future police service and its management (perhaps one under whose tutelage our grandchildren may have to live) to supplement any shortcomings in their DNA databases by the simple expedient of finding reasons to arrest - even if only for long enough to have those data recorded - even law-abiding citizens.
I know it sounds improbable and our current police officers would never, I'm sure, even contemplate such things but times change and custom - which reconciles us to all things - changes with them and it would be a poor parent or grandparent who did not care about the future conditions of life for his offspring.
Improbable as it might seem now, police officers of the future might even regularly arrest both injurer and injured, both burglar and home-defender, assault-and-batterer and self-defender - the former in each case to answer a charge, the latter to make his contribution to the all-important database.
Perhaps, if we all now willingly offered DNA samples, our children or their children might be spared such unwelcome attentions by their future guardians.

In response to James Carter
You fall into the trap set by the media and our regime of political subterfuge. Racism has many meanings. They use it spitefully saying it means hatred and so any debate on race flounders.
I see it as a preference for ones own kind. It does not imply all my own kind are good or better than others . They are my kind and if bad need to be dealt with by their peers. The Marxist concept of a vast melting pot is true racism as all races dissappear to be replaced by a mono race. This places us in a paradox. Lets melt all into one but in the meanwhile save the American Indians and the Australian aboriginy. The only way to preserve all races is by seperation . Not total just living room for each. If I voted UKIP then fine But I believe they are a safety valve party with no substance and a leader of even less.
So I stick with what I believe And the people that scream at me vile words. Well I just look at them and know that I am on the side of good.

Dear Peter,
I agree with you that there is a need for the creation of a new party, but
a) Telling people not to vote Tory will not work, for most die hard Tories will still vote Conservative. b) All the indications are that the Conservatives, therfore will win the next election, and will not split. c) Even if they lost the next election, there is no guarantee that they would split. This is why a new party is needed now
What is needed is a new party that will really address people`s concerns, led by men and women of principle and integrity, who will commit themselves to stopping this country sliding any further downhill. I am convinced that such a party, if it had the right policies, could easily win the next election. This is not so far fetched as it may seem. Both in Israel and in Fiji, which I have visited, new parties were formed, which both won the elections that took place a short time later.
Such a party would need to show that it understood the concerns that most British people have. The majority of British people:
1) Do not trust the Prime Minister, and did not agree with the invasion of Iraq, nor of Afghanistan, and want our troops to come home.
2) Want us to leave the E.U., and regain our sovereignty
3) Want a much tougher line on immigration, and think we have allowed in too many people, especially illegal and economic migrants, and that immigrants have not been integrated into British society, as they should have been.
4) Feel that we have lost the sense of our own identity as British, and this needs to be restored.
5) Disagree with the regional break up of Britain.
6) Are dissatisfied with the NHS, and think it should be improved, so that patients, especially the elderly, are given the priority.
7) Think that older people should be treated with more respect, and their pensions should be enough so they can live in dignity.
8) Regard Inheritance Tax as very unjust and iniquitous, and would like it scrapped.
9) Think animals should be treated more humanely, without cruelty, on the farm, during transport and in the laboratory.
10) Think our schools and colleges should be radically altered so they produce children who have a much better general education, and are much better behaved and show respect.
11) Think that the propogation of homosexuality in schools is offensive, and the idea of same gender "marriages" is repulsive.
l2) Think that the problems of litter, anti social behaviour, binge drinking and drug abuse are a national disgrace, and need to be dealt with more strictly.
13) Want to see more policemen on the beat, and quicker response to calls.
14) Think that murderers are treated far too lightly, and that capital punishment should be brought back.
15) Know that the family is the basic unit of society, and think every help should be given to support and reinstate it.

I am convinced that any party that dealt with these concerns and put forward such a programme should get elected, when you consider that the present government was elected by only 24.15% of the adult population, and a party with such policies as those above should easily get more than that, especially as it should get many of the disillusioned nonvoters to vote for it.
As has been pointed out, not enough people will vote for the BNP because of its reputation, and not enough people will vote for UKIP because they think it is a limited vision, one idea party
So a new party is needed, and it is quite possible for such a party to win, but it would have to be properly organized, and it would need to have respected people to lead it, in order to inspire confidence and attract the necessary funds. Surely there are respected people out there, people of integrity, who fear God, and are willing to try and bring this nation back into line with the will of God?
A political vacuum, such as we have now, cries out for big, bold ideas, and people who will take up the challenge. The time is ripe for a new initiative, and for honest, trustworthy, concerned and peace loving leaders to be in charge of this country. It is time for those with the highest ideals and intentions, who are really concerned about this nation that was once great, to respond and act now.

Until events prove me wrong, I'm happy to believe that the Tories will not introduce ID cards, as they have stated on a number of occasions. It would surely be a hugely embarrassing climbdown to introduce them later, the country can't afford such a scheme, and it would be hugely unpopular with the electorate. If Cameron really, really wanted to do so (and I have no reason to believe that he does) he could probably do so if he ends up with a majority similar to Blair in 1997. Although I think the Tories will win the next election, I don't think the victory will be on that scale.

As I said previously, I will not vote Conservative (instead, I will exercise my right not to vote); I merely pointed out that the ID card issue represents one of the few (the only?) substantive policy difference(s) between the two main parties.

Probably we could sum it all up by simply stating that we want a patriotic party to run our country. Someone who puts England's interests first.

A first step to this might be to release Scotland from '300 years of English oppression' (parentheses are placed to highliht the irony of this), this seriously impoverished nation has always dragged England down economically, given that the English mainly wanted the Union to eliminate the possibility of a hostile (or Catholic) monarch on the throne of our Northern land neighbour and some of the Scottish politicians (but not the majority of the people) mainly wanted it because they were financially broke. Why not let the people have their way, it's what the average Scot has wanted for 300 years, at a stroke you would relieve us of Labour's stronghold and probably destroy them for 50 years.

"'If New Labour run the country for another five years it will ruin Britain' to pause for a second and realise that - if the Tories have the same policies as Gordon Brown, as they do - they too will destroy the country in five years. In which case why vote for them?"

Because they will be more competent, because ideology is not the only thing in politics, becausea a leftist capable of balancing a national budget to within a tolerable degree is preferably to one who can't?

Again, I agree that, in the medium to long term, Tory policies are as disastrous for this country as Labour. I disagree that the risk in the next five years of say, a default of government debts or some other cataclysmic event, is anything like the same under a Tory or Labour government.

As you rightly point out, a vote for the Tories is a vote to continue New Labour government as practised for the last decade. What you fail to realise is that a vote for New Labour (or a protest vote that gives them power) runs a reasonable chance of being something even worse. Cameron is the new Blair, Brown is heading into something far weirder.

Or take this analogy, You are kept captive in a prison by a guard who slowly, bit by bit, worsens your conditions At the same time the guard also seems to be going progressively round the bend and eventually you are starting to seriously wonder if he might start firing random shots. However, you are given the choice of another guard on the strict conditions that he will continue the previous regime's trajectory, but minus all the lunatic stuff. Do you take it, or do you stick with the nutso in the hope that he might shoot himself instead of you, allowing you to escape?

That seems to me the dilemma. Vote Tory and there is a 100% things will get worse. Vote Labour and the odds are 70% things will get worse, but 20% that things will get way, way worse and very quickly. However, there's a 10% chance things might get much, much better.

On the whole, I'm willing to take the punt, but I think it would be helpful, Mr Hitchens, if you at least acknowledged what kinds of risks are associated with the programme you offer.

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this weblog until the moderator has approved them. They must not exceed 500 words. Web links cannot be accepted, and may mean your whole comment is not published.